aA) 


Prominent  iVLezzotinters 


of  the  XVIII  Century 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2019  with  funding  from 
Getty  Research  Institute 


https://archive.org/details/notesonprominentOOmkno 


Amelia  Elisabeth  a.  b.g. Hassle  LandgraviAcTc. 

COMITISSA  HANOVIJL  MVNT2EN1 : 

s^vCd&rjac <£>£,<£&,  XV I LH ELMO  VI  DC  HaSSI*.  I.  \NDCR  err  font  ^rrniistnuL'fjt-r* 
a^ru&n*Jirii£X? ^J~Qro  ycswn  a.  sc^stAUtffi^ctwn  ^wjuJnftirg  audo  Ichiro  *o* 

cr*£^*S  ^  ^^C/D/DCXLJI 


First  Mezzotint 


Notes  on  Prominent 
Mezzotint  Engrav¬ 
ers  of  the  XVIII 
C  e  n  t  u  r  y 


New  York 

M.  KNOEDLER  &  CO. 
Fifth  Avenue  at  34II1  St. 
1904 


PUBLISHED  AND  COPYRIGHTED 
BY 

$Et.  EtioeUIer  Si  Co. 

355  FIFTH  AYE..  N.  Y. 
MCMIV 


Introduction 


We  issued  last  year  a  brochure  giving  “  some  in¬ 
formation  regarding  18th  century  mezzotint 
engravers  and  their  work.”  This  was  so  well  re¬ 
ceived  that  we  have  concluded  to  add  to  the  subject 
by  noting  a  few  interesting  facts  connected  with  the 
men  of  the  profession  who  worked  most  success¬ 
fully  during  that  period,  and  the  last  few  months  of 
of  the  17th  century. 

This  little  pamphlet  is  not  intended  for  reference, 
but  simply  to  convey  to  the  lovers  of  art  a  few  facts 
which  may  interest  them  in  a  subject  concerning 
which  the  more  one  learns  about  the  more  fascin¬ 
ated  with  it  does  one  become.  In  order  to  thor¬ 
oughly  appreciate  the  difficulties  met  with  and 
overcome  by  these  early  mezzotint  engravers,  it 
must  be  remembered  that  in  their  day  our  modern 
mechanical  and  chemical  reproductive  processes 
were  unknown.  Their  engravings  had  to  be  made 
direct  from  the  painting,  the  manifold  color  and 
tonal  values  of  which  had  to  be  correctly  rendered 
by  the  mezzotinter,  whose  range  was  limited  to  the 
tones  between  his  two  extremes,  namely  black — the 
ink,  and  white — the  paper.  This  being  the  case,  it 
can  easily  be  conceived  that  to  attain,  in  so  difficult  a 


^ffiaac 

^Scctictt 


medium,  such  perfect  results  as  are  to  be  found  in 
the  works  of  the  great  mezzotinters  of  the  18th  cen¬ 
tury,  necessitated  not  only  patience  and  long  prac¬ 
tice  but  artistic  skill  of  a  high  order  and  a  thorough 
knowledge  of  the  technicalities  of  the  art.  It  is 
only  by  the  most  careful  and  judicious  scraping  and 
and  burnishing  of  the  “grounded”  or  prepared 
copper  plate  that  it  is  rendered  capable  of  taking 
the  exact  amount  of  ink  required  to  produce  the 
varying  tones,  ranging  from  the  deepest  shadows 
to  the  highest  lights. 

We  have  confined  the  list  to  the  most  eminent 
exponents  of  the  art,  giving  such  facts  connected 
with  their  lives  and  work  as  we  believe  will  be  in¬ 
teresting  and  useful  and  will  lead  to  a  proper  under 
standing  of  the  great  mezzotinters  of  this 
period.  We  have  found  it  most  difficult  in  many 
instances,  owing  to  the  lack  of  contemporary  in. 
formation,  to  obtain  all  we  have  sought  for,  and  ask 
therefore  the  reader’s  kind  indulgence  for  any 
short-comings.  It  has  seemed  advisable  to  com¬ 
mence  with  the  name  of  the  best  artist  of  the 
earliest  period,  then  pass  to  those  who  followed 
him,  concluding  with  the  acknowledged  leaders. 

The  earliest  English  mezzotinter  of  emminence 
was  Isaac  Beckett.  He  was  an  Englishman, 
and  indeed  the  first  of  that  nationality  to  found 


the  school  in  his  own  country,  for  Place  and  Sher- 
win  who  preceded  him,  were  practically  amateurs. 

In  early  life  Beckett  was  apprenticed  to  a  calico 
printer,  but  became  a  pupil  of  John  Lloyd.  After 
Lloyd  had  shown  him  what  was  possible  to  be  done 
in  mezzotinto  he  became  an  enthusiastic  worker, 
and  not  only  acquired  all  Lloyd’s  knowledge,  but 
improved  and  added  to  it.  It  seems  probable  that 
Lloyd  did  not  himself  produce  any  plates,  but  con¬ 
tented  himself  with  publishing  and  selling  the  work 
of  others,  attaching  his  name  to  the  prints  he 
published,  “  Lloyd  ex.”  or  “  excudit.” 

It  is  said  that  E.  Luttrell  engraved  many  of  the 
works  which  bear  Lloyd’s  name.  Luttrell 
was  an  Irishman,  and  flourished  from  1681  to  1710.  0.  Luttrell 
He  made  a  thorough  study  of  the  art,  and  it  is  said 
that  while  seeking  to  acquire  it  laid  in  his  grounds 
with  a  roller.  It  was  the  practice  of  these  early  en¬ 
gravers  to  publish  their  own  as  well  as  other  en¬ 
gravers’  works,  simply  adding  “  ex  ”  or  “  excudit,” 
after  the  signature.  There  is  no  question  but 
that  John  Lloyd,  even  though  he  actually  made  but 
few  plates,  taught  the  art  to  a  number  of  pupils. 

As  suggested,  Lloyd  was  more  of  a  business 
man  than  an  artist.  While  he  appreciated 
and  foresaw  what  could  be  accomplished,  he  pre¬ 
ferred  that  others  should  do  the  work.  He  is  said  to 
have  procured  the  secret  from  Blois,  who  learned  it 


from  Abraham  Blooteling,  a  distinguished  engraver, 
born  in  Amsterdam  in  1634,  and  a  scholar  of  the  great 
master,  Cornelius  Visscher.  Blooteling  worked  in 
^Ujrafjant  line  and  mezzotinto ;  the  latter  art  he  probably 
^SlOOteltnjI  acquired  from  Furstenberg.  He  spent  a  number  of 
years  in  the  latter  part  of  the  17th  century  in  Eng¬ 
land,  where  he  improved  the  process  by  additional 
working  of  the  ground,  making  its  texture  closer 
and  giving  a  much  more  brilliant  effect  to  the  print. 
From  Beckett  we  turn  to  the  foremost  engraver  of 
his  time— John  Smith.  Writers  on  the  life  of  this 
artist  do  not  all  agree  upon  the  date  of  his  birth  and 
death.  It  seems,  however,  but  reasonable  that  we 
should  accept  the  inscription  upon  his  tombstone  at 
St.  Peters,  Northampton,  where  he  is  buried,  which 
runs:  “Near  this  placeliethe remains  of  John  Smith, 
of  London,  Gnt,  the  most  eminent  engraver  in  mez- 
zotint  of  his  time.  He  died  the  XVII.  Jan. 
MDCCXLII,  age  XC.”  This  would  make  the  year 
of  his  birth  1652.  There  is  some  uncertainty  as  to 
who  were  his  teachers,  but  it  has  been  generally  ac¬ 
cepted  that  J.  Beckett  and  Vandervaart  did  more 
than  any  others  towards  his  advance¬ 
ment.  A  number  of  engravers  became  publishers 
of  his  plates.  Beckett  was  one  of  them ;  others 
were  R.  Palmer,  P.  Tempest,  Browne  and  E. 
Cooper,  until  Smith  went  into  business  for  himself 
at  the  “  Lion  &  Crown.”  Most  of  his  works  bear 
the  publishers’  addresses.  Those  which  have  not 


were  finished  for  private  personages  and  not  for 
sale.  John  Smith  was  highly  appreciated  during 
his  life.  Sir  Horace  Walpole  considered  him  “  One 
of  the  great  improvers  of  the  art.”  He  excelled  in 
brilliancy  of  effect,  and  was  powerful,  clear  and 
correct  in  drawing.  In  some  ways  he  might  be  con¬ 
sidered  inferior  to  J.  Beckett  and  R.  Williams, 
being  more  metallic  and  less  vigorous  than  they. 

He  did  not  have  the  tender  artistic  feeling  of  John 
Simon,  an  early  engraver  of  note.  Some  plates 
marked  “John  Smith  ex  ”  were  originally  engraved 
by  J.  Beckett,  B.  Lens,  J.  Simon,  R.  Williams,  and 
others.  This  is  accounted  for  by  the  fact  that  he 
would  take  a  finished  plate  by  another  engraver, 
work  over  and  improve  it.  The  list  of  mezzotint 
portraits  engraved  by  Smith  number  287.  He  also  (COUtUlttelj) 
engraved  a  large  number  of  subject  pieces.  In  a 
financial  way  he  was  a  success,  for  he  retired 
from  business  after  realizing  by  his  industry  and 
talents  a  comfortable  independence.  That  Smith 
knew  the  value  of  earliness  of  impression  is 
shown  by  the  fact  that  he  preserved  his 
proofs.  He  also  destroyed  his  plates  when 
worn.  Some  of  these  destroyed  plates  have  been 
carefully  restored  since  his  death,  and  one  may  find 
prints  in  the  market  on  which  are  still  signs  of  the 
marks  made  to  deface  them.  His  first  plate  was 
about  1687.  He  did  a  large  number  (127)  from  Sir 
Godfrey  Kneller’s  paintings. 


Joljn 

J&mttl) 


3Fofm 

JF abet,  i§>t, 
Solm 
jFafcr, 


3T  antes 
Jftc&rlieU 


Two  engravers  of  this  period  are  worthy  of  notice, 
viz,  the  two  Fabers  John  Faber,  Sr.,  who  died  in 
1721,  and  his  son,  who  died  in  1756.  They  both 
came  to  England  from  Holland  in  1687,  the  son  be¬ 
ing  then  three  years  old.  The  latter’s  works  were 
mostly  portraits,  and  mark  the  period  between  Knel- 
ler  and  Reynolds,  whose  names  have  so  entirely 
eclipsed  those  of  the  painters  who  came  between 
them,  that  of  these  comparatively  little  is  known. 
The  younger  Faber  probably  introduced  the  prac¬ 
tice  of  cutting  down  plates.  The  father  engraved 
about  78  portraits,  and  the  son  about  419.  We 
mention  these  engravers  because  they  mark  an 
important  epoch  in  the  glorious  period  which 
reached  its  climax  some  forty  years  after  the 
younger  Faber’s  death. 

The  most  prominent  engraver  to  follow  Smith  was 
James  McArdell,  who  was  born  in  Dublin  about 
1728  and  died  in  1765.  He  came  to  London  in  1747 
with  John  Brooks.  Afterwards  in  1757  he 
established  himself  as  a  publisher  at  the  Golden 
Head,  Convent  Garden,  where  most  of  his  prints 
were  published.  He  died  young,  being  only  37 
years  old.  He  was  a  pupil  of  John  Brooks,  of  Dub¬ 
lin,  a  line  engraver,  who  afterward  started  mezzo- 
tinto,  but  does  not  seem  to  have  left  anything  re¬ 
markable  unless  it  is  the  portrait  of  Margaret 
Woffington,  dated  “  June  ye  1st,  1750,”  an  impres* 


sion  of  which  is  in  the  British  Museum.  This  is  the 
earliest  known  portrait  of  her.  He  had  a  number 
of  pupils ;  viz,  McArdell,  Houston,  Spooner,  Pur¬ 
cell,  and  Ford,  and,  as  customary  at  the  time, 
published  their  work  with  his  own  name  as  en¬ 
graver.  In  McArdell  we  find  his  greatest  scholar. 

He  became  indeed  one  of  the  most  eminent  masters 
in  mezzotinto,  for  he  possessed  qualities  that 
neither  his  master  nor  his  fellow-pupils  had ; 
namely,  great  natural  capacity,  application  and 
industry.  He  carried  on  the  art  from  the 
point  where  Faber  left  off,  displaying  bold¬ 
ness,  decision,  and  freedom  of  handling,  with-  „ 
out  losing  either  accuracy  or  truth.  McArdell  en-  ^ 
graved  over  200  portraits,  of  which  about  35  were  ;Ptc2JtUeU 
after  Reynolds.  He  it  was  who  engraved  in  1754  (coattmtetl) 
the  portrait  of  “  Lady  Charlotte  Fitzwilliam,”  and 
“  Anne  Dawson  in  the  character  of  Diana,”  after 
Reynolds.  These  are  the  earliest  mezzotints  from 
portraits  by  this  celebrated  painter.  How  near  the 
prediction  of  Sir  Joshua  came  true  when  he  said 
that  “  his  own  fame  would  be  preserved  by  McAr- 
dell’s  engravings  when  pictures  had  faded  away  ” 
can  be  seen  by  an  inspection  in  various  museums 
of  the  many  paintings  by  him,  which  show  the  result 
of  using  the  injurious  mediums  with  which  he 
experimented.  On  the  other  hand  we  find  the 
prints  have  become  even  more  beautiful  with  age, 
none  having  deteriorated  from  natural  causes. 


Valentine 


When  McArcell  died  he  left  a  number  of  unfinished 
plates.  Five  of  these  were  completed  by  Sayer ; 
others  were  tampered  with  without  altering  the  ad¬ 
dresses;  some  were  falsified  so  as  to  resemble  proofs. 
It  is  interesting  to  note  that  he  engraved  six  plates 
of  David  Garrick,  one  of  George  II.,  and  two  of 
George  III. 

One  would  think,  after  examining  the  works  of  the 
foregoing  engravers,  that  there  was  little  to  learn 
beyond  what  they  had  accomplished,  but  we  find 
in  V alentine  Green  a  mezzotinter  who  carried  the  art 
even  farther,  and  has  left  behind  him  a  name  which 
will  always  rank  among  the  greatest  of  its  ex¬ 
ponents.  Born  1739,  he  died  in  1813  at  the 
age  of  74,  having  in  that  time  accomplished  much. 
The  principal  things  to  be  remembered  in  his  career 
are  as  follows  :  In  1767  he  was  elected  a  Fellow  of 
the  Incorporated  Society  of  Artists.  In  1769  his  first 
plate  after  Sir  Joshua  Reynolds  was  engraved.  In 
1773  he  was  appointed  mezzotint  engraver  to  George 
III.  and  in  1774  was  elected  one  of  the  six  asso¬ 
ciate  engravers  of  the  Academy.  In  1775  he  was  ap¬ 
pointed  mezzotint  engraver  to  Charles  Theodore, 
Elector  Palatine ;  and  also  made  a  Fellow  of  the 
Society  of  Antiquaries.  In  June  1789,  the  Elector 
Palatine  (who  was  Duke  of  Bavaria)  granted  to 
Green  and  his  son  the  exclusive  privilege  of  en¬ 
graving  prints  from  the  Dusseldorf  Gallery. 


He  completed  over  20  plates,  but  it  was 
a  most  unprofitable  undertaking,  for  in  it 
he  lost  all  his  savings.  In  1793  were  exhibited 
copies  of  the  Dusseldorf  pictures.  In  1804  his  son 
and  partner,  Ruppert,  died.  In  1805  he  was  appoint¬ 
ed  keeper  of  the  British  Institution  on  its  establish¬ 
ment  a  position  he  held  until  his  death.  It  is  stated 
that  V.  Green’s  father  was  a  dancing  master,  that 
he  started  life  in  a  town  clerk’s  office,  studying  law. 
Upon  coming  of  age  he  left  the  legal  profession  and 
apprenticed  himself  to  Robert  Hancock,  the  potter 
and  line  engraver  of  Worcester.  It  was  while  he 
was  with  Hancock  that  his  ‘‘Survey  of  Worcester” 
appeared,  in  1764.  In  1765  he  left  Worcester  for 
London  to  become  one  of  the  greatest  of  his  craft. 
He  was  almost  self-taught,  for  although  Hancock 
“scraped”  (a  word  which  is  used  to  indicate  mezzo¬ 
tint  engraving)  and  must  have  imparted  to  him  the 
process,  he  never  produced  anything  of  note  while 
with  him  or  aught  which  showed  that  he  was  ac¬ 
quainted  with  much  more  than  the  rudiments  of  the 
art.  His  style  was  peculiarly  his  own ; 
the  grounding  of  his  plates  was  made  with  a  fine 
toothed  rocking  tool,  producing  a  soft,  velvety 
quality,  and  the  scraping  was  performed  with  a 
delicate,  refined  touch  that  no  other  mezzotinter 
excelled.  All  his  early  training,  his  danc¬ 
ing,  studying  law,  line  engraving,  and  antiquarian 
studies  seem  to  have  fitted  him  most  thoroughly 


Valentine 

(0tcen 

(conttnuetj) 


for  the  profession  which  he  so  ably  represented. 
His  great  mastery  of  his  art  enabled  him  to  produce 
the  leading  characteristics  of  the  painters  of  the 
day,  making  them  works  of  art  apart  from  their 
representations  of  the  personages.  Sometimes  both 
objects  were  attained,  often,  especially  with  Reyn¬ 
olds,  the  picture  was  more  thought  of  than  the  like¬ 
ness  which  had  been  the  object  of  the  earlier 
painters,  with  the  exception,  perhaps,  of  Lely.  The 
best  plates  done  by  him  are  those  after  Sir  Joshua 
Reynolds,  portraits  of  ladies.  The  list  of  these  por¬ 
traits  contains  20  numbers,  not  so  many  as  Me 
Ardell  owing  to  the  quarrel  he  had  with  Reynolds 
Valentine  about  the  portrait  of  Mrs.  Siddons  as  “  The  Tragic 
<£>reen  Muse.”  Mrs.  Siddons  had  requested  Reynolds  to 
(conttntictl)  have  it  engraved  by  Francis  Haward,  although  she 
did  not  remember  the  engraver’s  name  at  the  time 
she  wrote  Reynolds.  When  Valentine  Green  was 
told  by  Reynolds  that  Mrs.  Siddons  had  asked  to 
have  the  work  done  by  Haward  he  thought  that 
Reynolds  was  deceiving  him,  and  that  he  it  was  in¬ 
stead  of  Mrs.  Siddons  who  wanted  it  done.  To 
convince  Green,  Reynolds  was  obliged  to  show  him 
Mrs.  Siddons’  letter.  This  letter  still  exists,  is  in 
possession  of  Sir  Robert  Edgecombe,  and  reads  as 
follows:  “Mrs.  Siddons’  compliments  to  Sir  Joshua 
Reynolds,  and  thinks  with  all  submission  to  his 
better  judgement  that  the  picture  should  be  put  into 
the  hands  of  that  person  (whose  name  she  cannot 


at  this  moment  recollect)  who  has  executed  the 
print  of  the  children  from  a  picture  by  Sir  Joshua 
in  so  masterly  a  manner.  May  7,  1783.”  The  pic¬ 
ture  referred  to  was  “  The  Infant  Academy,”  be¬ 
longing  to  Lord  Iveagh. 

The  quarrel  was  so  bitter  that  Sir  Joshua  lost  his 
temper  and  wrote  Green  saying  :  “  That  note,  as 
I  expected  to  be  believed,  I  never  dreamed  of  show¬ 
ing,  and  I  now  blush  at  being  forced  to  send  it  in 
my  own  vindication. ”  Green  never  engraved  any 
more  of  Reynold’s  works  after  this  episode. 

Valentine  Green  engraved  325  plates;  of  these  163 
were  portraits  after  various  artists ;  at  least  50  dif¬ 
ferent  ones  are  mentioned  in  his  list,  while  qq  of 
his  plates  on  all  subjects  were  after  different  artists* 

On  January  1,  1780,  he  made  the  following  an¬ 
nouncement: — “PROPOSALS,  by  Mr.  Green  for 
publishing  by  subscription  six  whole  length  por¬ 
traits  of  the  Nobility  (Ladies)  from  original  pictures 
by  Sir  Joshua  Reynolds,  Knt.,  forming  a  series  of 
BEAUTIES  of  the  present  age,  on  the  plan  of  those 
in  the  Royal  collection  at  Windsor  by  Sir  Peter 
Lely,  and  at  Hampton  Court  by  Sir  Godfrey  Knel- 
ler.  Engraved  and  published  by  V.  Green,  Mezzo- 
tinto  Engraver  to  His  Majesty,  &c. 

CONDITIONS.  Two  portraits  will  be  pub¬ 
lished  together.  Price  to  Subscribers  Twelve  Shil- 


Menttnc 
< 3vttn 
(tonttnueU) 


Valentine 

(£freen 

(conttmtefc) 


lings  each  ;  Non-Subscribers  Fifteen  Shillings  each. 
N.  B.  This  Series  of  Portraits  will  be  extended  in 
proportion  as  the  Nobility  and  the  Public  patronize 
the  Undertaking.  Subscriptions  are  received  by 
Mr.  Green  only  at  his  House,  No.  29,  Newman- 
Street,  Oxford-Street.” 

Afterwards  this  number  was  increased  to  nine. 
These  plates  are  those  for  the  possession  of 
which  there  is  to  day  such  keen  competition,  and 
whose  prices  have  thus  been  so  greatly  enhanced. 
The  following  is  a  list  of  the  nine  subjects : — 

“  LADY  JANE  HALLIDAY.”  Died  1802. 
Daughter  of  3d  Earl  of  Dysart.  Married  (1) 
John  D.  Halliday,  1771,  and  (2)  George  D.  Ferry, 
1802.  Published  Dec.  24th,  1779. 

“  LADY  LOUISA  MANNERS.”  Born  1745,  died 
1840.  Daughter  of  3d  Earl  of  Dysart.  Married 
John  Manners,  M.  P.  Became  Countess  of  Dy¬ 
sart  in  her  own  right,  1821.  Published  Dec.  24, 
1779. 

“  COUNTESS  OF  HARRINGTON  (JANE 
FLEMING).”  Died  1824.  Wife  of  Charles 
Stanhope,  3d  Earl  of  Harrington.  Engraved 
May  1,  1780. 

“  DUCHESS  OF  DEVONSHIRE,  (GEORGI- 
ANNA  SPENCER).”  Born  1757,  died  1806. 
First  wife  of  William  Cavendish,  5th  Duke  of 
Devonshire.  Published  July  1,  1780. 


“  DUCHESS  OF  RUTLAND,  (MARY  ISABEL¬ 
LA  SOMERSET).”  Died  1831.  Wife  of 
Charles  Manners,  4th  Duke  of  Rutland.  Pub¬ 
lished  July  1,  1780. 

“VISCOUNTESS  TOWNSHEND,  (ANNE. 
MONTGOMERY).”  Born  1754,  died  1819. 
Second  wife  of  George,  1st  Marquess  Townshend 
Published  Dec.  1,  1780. 

“  LADY  ELIZABETH  COMPTON.”  Born 
1760,  died  1835.  Daughter  of  Chas.  7th  Earl  of 
Northampton.  Married  George  Cavendish,  1st 
Earl  of  Burlington,  1782.  Published  Dec.  1,  1781. 

“  COUNTESS  OF  SALISBURY,  (MARY 
AMELIA  HILL).”  Born  1750,  died  1835.  Wife 
of  James  Cecil,  1st  Marquess  of  Salisbury.  She 
perished  in  the  fire  at  Hatfield  House,  November 
2 7,  1835.  Published  Dec.  1,  1781. 

“  COUNTESS  TALBOT,  (CHARLOTTE 
HILL).”  Born  1754,  died  1804.  Wife  of  John 
Chetwynd,  1st  Earl  Talbot.  Published  May  1, 
1782. 

Green  engraved  a  great  many  subjects  after  Ben¬ 
jamin  West.  These  do  not,  however,  add  anything 
to  his  reputation,  although  during  his  life  many  of 
these  subjects  were  more  popular  and  brought  prices 
far  in  advance  of  his  portraits  after  Reynolds. 

It  may  be  of  interest  to  know  that  103  different  en¬ 
gravers  in  all  are  on  record  as  having  made  plates 


^alenttne 

0teen 

(canttntieU) 


Valentine  from  Sir  Joshua  Reynolds’  works.  There  are  4000 
(55rccn  authenticated  paintings  by  him,  of  which  504  have 
been  engraved  by  eminent  engravers,  and  15 1  by 
(conttntteto)  others,  making  655  up  to  1822. 


James  and  Thos.  Watson,  although  of  the  same 
name,  and  only  three  years  apart  in  age,  were  not 
of  the  same  family.  James  was  born  in  Ireland, 
and  Thomas  in  England.  The  latter  was  associated 
in  business  with  William  Dickinson,  publisher  and 
engraver.  Both  Watsons  were  prominent  mezzo, 
tint  engravers,  James  producing  about  167  portraits, 
the  most  prominent  of  which  were  59  after  Rey¬ 
nolds;  19  after  Cotes,  4  after  Gainsborough,  8 
after  Read,  4  after  Van  Dyck,  and  5  after  Webster. 
Batson  j_je  reproduces  in  the  list  of  his  engravings  of  por- 
1740=1 790  traits  58  different  painters.  What  may  seem 
API  strange  is  that  he  made  only  one  plate  after  Rom- 
ney.  This  was  the  portrait  of  Charles,  Duke  of 
Batson  Richmond,  executed  in  1778.  It  is  understood  that 
1743=1781  he  learned  the  art  from  McArdell.  He  left  a 
daughter,  Caroline,  who  was  an  accomplished 
stipple  and  mixed  engraver,  and  was  appointed  en¬ 
graver  to  Queen  Caroline,  wife  of  George  III. ,  in 
1785.  She  died  June  1,  1814.  James  Watson’s 
style  was  delicate  and  finished.  He  was  particular 
to  have  his  plates  as  perfect  as  possible,  often  re¬ 
engraving  another  plate  instead  of  retouching  and 
altering  the  original  one.  He  scraped  a  number  of 


subject  pieces  after  Metzu,  Moreelse,  Schalken,  and 
other  Dutch  artists;  also,  “The  Children  in  the 
Wood,”  after  Reynolds.  James  Watson  lived  50 
years,  while  Thomas  was  taken  suddenly  sick  and 
died  in  his  38th  year.  Thomas  engraved  a  number 
of  plates,  assisted  by  Wm.  Dickinson,  with  whom 
he  became  associated  in  1776.  Dickinson  was  an 
excellent  draughtsman,  producing  many  beautiful 
mezzotints,  after  Reynolds,  Romney  and 
Peters.  He  worked  also  in  stipple,  a  method  much 
in  vogue  at  that  time.  Thomas  Watson  died  in 
Paris,  in  1823. 

His  first  engravings  appeared  in  about  the  year 
1775.  He  was  highly  thought  of  by  the  artists, 
and  especially  by  George  Romney,  of  whose  por¬ 
traits  he  engraved  at  least  17  ;  29  are  recorded  after 
Reynolds.  These  do  not  include  5  fancy  or  compo¬ 
sition  works  by  the  same  painter.  He  engraved  a 
number  of  plates  after  Gainsborough,  Raeburn, 
Hoppner,  &c.  His  style  is  powerful  and  artistic, 
but  not,  as  a  general  rule,  carefully  finished.  He 
worked  both  in  mezzotinto  and  stipple.  He  seems 
to  have  practiced  only  about  20  years,  producing 
in  that  time  about  87  mezzotints. 

We  now  come  to  one  whom  many  believe  to  be 
the  greatest  mezzotint  artist  of  the  18th  century, 
He  might  also  be  classed  among  the  portrait 
painters  and  miniature  artists,  for  he  produced 


3f  antes 
Batson 
17404790 

(£1)06. 
Batson 
17434  781 
(conttnueti) 


3fo!)n 

Sones 

Slbaut 

17404797 


many  such  works,  often  reproducing  them  in  mez- 
zotinto.  His  work,  however,  with  the  brush  was 
secondary  in  merit  to  that  with  the  scraper.  He 
worked  in  the  stipple  method,  also,  but  not  to  any 
great  extent.  The  portraits  after  Reynolds,  Gains¬ 
borough,  Peters  and  Romney  were  the  most  success¬ 
ful  of  his  works.  He  succeeded  in  producing 
the  feeling  of  the  brush,  being  distinguished  for 
great  freedom  and  delicacy.  Rarely  are  the  finest 
impressions  seen  at  auction  or  the  printsellers. 
When  they  do  appear  they  attract  earnest  atten¬ 
tion,  and  command  high  prices.  At  the  present 
time  the  honor  of  the  highest  price  for  a  mezzotint 
engraving  belongs  to  him.  This  was  the  portrait 
of  Mrs.  Carnac,  after  Sir  Joshua  Reynolds,  a 
whole-length  standing  figure,  with  landscape  back- 
1752-1812  ground,  which  sold  at  auction  for  $6,090.  The  sim¬ 
plicity  in  composition  and  style  of  Romney’s  works 
evidently  appealed  to  him,  and  he  produced  many 
admirable  plates, — plates  which  have  never  been 
excelled.  He  commenced  to  publish  for  himself  in 
1773  at  4  Exeter  Court,  Strand,  removing  in  1775 
to  10  Bateman  Building,  Soho.  Here  he  was  as¬ 
sisted  in  publishing  by  Humphrey  and  Birchell. 
From  here  he  removed  in  1781  to  83  Oxford  Street, 
where  he  was  appointed  mezzotint  engraver  to  the 
Prince  of  Wales.  In  1784  he  finally  settled  at  31 
King  St.,  Convent  Garden.  The  early  prints 
which  were  issued  from  4  Exeter  Court  are  very 


3M» 

Kap&ael 


Q Portrait  of  DZZrs.  Carttac 

Highest  Priced  Mezzotint 


uncommon.  Those  from  io  Bateman  Building  and 
83  Oxford  St.,  are,  with  few  exceptions,  ranked 
among  the  most  admirable  productions  of  the  art- 
He  did  some  fine  plates  from  31  King  St.,  which 
were  altered  in  style  somewhat  from  those  issued  at 
his  previous  places  of  business,  but  are  not  so  wor¬ 
thy  of  notice  or  so  pleasing  in  subjects.  Many  of 
the  earlier  ones  were  portraits  of  fair  ladies  whose  1 

beauty  must  have  been  eminently  attractive.  One  Kapljael 
of  these  fair  ones,  Emma  Hart,  afterwards  Lady 
Hamilton,  he  engraved  after  Reynolds  and  Romney.  17524 SI  2 
There  is  a  list  of  302  pieces  in  a  catalogue  issued  fronthitteU") 
about  the  close  of  the  18th  century.  Of  these  at 
least  200  were  mezzotint  portraits. 

In  personality  John  R.  Smith  was  a  most  charming 
and  cultivated  person.  His  knowledge  and  great 
store  of  information  about  art  brought  him  much  in 
society.  He  was  fond  of  sports  and  sporting  people. 

This  prevented  him  from  accumulating  the  fortune 
that  he  might  otherwise  have  made  from  his  art. 

He  did  numerous  subject  pieces  after  Morland, 

Wright,  Carter,  Fuseli,  &c. 

William  and  James  Ward  were  brothers. 

James  was  a  distinguished  painter  and  en- 17664826 
graver.  William  was  a  mezzotinter,  and  the 
most  distinguished  pupil  of  J.  R.  Smith. 

They  both  ‘‘scraped”  after  the  greatest  artists 

of  the  day.  James,  the  younger,  lived  to  17004859 


Militant 

^arU 


the  good  age  of  ninety,  while  William  died  very 
suddenly  when  only  fifty  years  old,  leaving  a  son 
who  followed  the  same  pursuit,  but  as  he  flourished 
in  the  XIXth  century  he  finds  no  place  in  this  article. 
William  lived  in  a  world  of  art,  having  married  a 
sister  of  George  Morland,  who  had,  when  he  was 
but  20  years  old,  married  Ward’s  sister.  These 
two  ladies  were  noted  for  their  beauty,  and  were 
often  the  models  for  their  husbands’  pictures. 
Ward  scraped  a  large  number  of  subject  prints 
H?tlltatn  which  are  very  beautiful  and  much  sought  after, 
i^artl  “The  Visit  to  theBoarding  School, ”  after  Mor- 
land,  is  perhaps  the  best  known  subject  picture  in 
1  ^  mezzotint.  He  wasappointed  mezzotint  engraver  to 

antes  the  Prince  of  Wales,  and  became  A.  R.  A.  in  1814. 

James  Ward  was  a  pupil  of  his  brother,  and  of  J.  R. 
1769-1 S59  Smith, and  seems  to  have  followed  the  art  in  the  early 
(conttnueU)  part  of  his  life  but  devoting  it  almost  exclusively  to 
painting  in  his  latter  years.  In  1794  he  was  ap¬ 
pointed  painter  and  mezzotint  engraver  to  the 
Prince  of  Wales,  was  made  A.  R.  A.  in  1807,  and  R* 
A.  in  1811.  There  is  a  most  interesting  collection 
in  the  British  Museum  of  his  work  on  copper,  for 
he  preserved  most  of  his  progress  proofs,  and 
this  collection  represents,  with  few  exceptions,  his 
entire  work.  It  was  presented  by  him  June  28, 
1817.  J.  C.  Smith,  in  his  work  on  British  Mez¬ 
zotint  portraits,  says : 


“  This  most  interesting  collection  amply  proves  the 
high  artistic  requirements  of  mezzotints,  and  com¬ 
pletely  refutes  the  idea  of  this  mode  of  engraving 
being  a  mechanical  imitation  of  painting.  On  one 
proof,  after  Hoppner,  Ward  notes  that  when  the 
painter  had  suggested  alteration,  not  only  was  it 
not  carried  out  in  the  print,  but  the  picture  was 
actually  repainted  so  as  to  accord  to  the  engraver’s 
rendering.5’ 


GOERCK  ART  PRESS 
B’WAY  AT  51  ST.  N.Y, 


96-6313*13 


0 


-• 


, 

V 


